Archive | Uncategorized RSS feed for this section

When will the crime problem stop getting worse and start getting better? The evidence says it’s still getting worse

19 Aug

This morning, riding bikes in a markedly deteriorating Bidwell Park, my husband and I found evidence of car break-ins at the parking area there at the gate above 5 Mile, where Centennial hits Chico Canyon.

I was shocked that a person had just driven right up and parked on top of an obvious crime scene.

I was shocked that a person had just driven right up and parked on top of an obvious crime scene.

 

From the piles of glass, it looked like at least four cars had been violated.

From the piles of glass, it looked like at least four cars had been violated.

As my husband was snapping the photos, a neighbor came along with her large German shepherd. She asked us what was going on. We pointed out the glass on the ground, and she seemed shocked. I don’t think she would have noticed it if we hadn’t pointed it out to her.

I was shocked that people would just drive up and park their cars at the scene of the crime and wander off down that trail.

I’m not reporting this to Chico PD, because I don’t know any of the details, and I would assume that the owners of the cars would report it.  But, I’m reporting it to you, and I hope the word gets out.

I’m not going to assume anything, except that several cars had their windows busted out in this spot. I’m guessing it wasn’t a rash of people locking their keys in the car. I’m also guessing that it happened at the same time, quickly, because the glass looked all the same, as though it hadn’t been laying there very long. I’m no Columbo, but I’ll guess if you park there the chances are pretty good your car will be broken into, I think that’s a pretty safe guess.

Later in the morning my husband took me to a North Chico hardware store, and overheard the cashier telling the customer ahead of us that he should never leave valuables in his car, and always lock it up when he was going to be away from it for any amount of time.  Car break-ins are becoming common all over town.

We heard a lot about the “carjacking” over on Vallombrosa.  I’m not sure what separates “carjacking” from “car theft,” unless it’s the fact that the victim actually made contact with the thief, chasing the car as it sped off. In one early report, I heard the car was left running in front of her house, unattended. Later it was said the keys were left in it. She said she just went into the house to get a few things, etc. I hate to go all Jack Webb on you, but the cops have the discretion to cite a person for leaving their car keys in the car, and I’m pretty sure the insurance company takes a dim view of that kind of behavior. Leaving a car running unattended is a threat to public safety.

Wake Up People!

The car broken into across the street from my house had a purse left laying right on the seat in full view – her window was smashed so fast a woman looking out a window across the street didn’t even see it. She just saw a man walking away.   A friend of my kid’s left his IPOD on the seat of his car at Bear Hole, in full view, and his wallet under the seat. His window was broken out and both were taken from his car.

I think this is a matter of professionals who know how to get into your car quick, know what to take and how to cash it in. I’ve heard some interesting chatter about various ways thieves break into cars, but for the “smash and grab,” they’re not after the car, they’re after valuables they  can carry away in a backpack.

So, you think you’d see people walking around with little hammers or something – those would be heavy and hard to conceal. And pretty damned incriminating. There’s a funny little trick these thieves use – tempered glass from broken automobile spark plugs. They’re called “ninja rocks”, and as of 2003, the California penal codes lists them as “burglary tools.” But they’re alot easier to conceal, and probably just about as easy to discard on the run.

Want to see how fast it happens? Watch this video:

and here’s Part II, where he busts a toilet with a sledge hammer – this guy is a scientist!

I’m guessing these are common around Chico. I’m guessing many of the “street people” we see weaving their way through town and along Chico Creek are professional criminals who find the homeless highway a very convenient getaway, going from town to town, stealing as a way to make ends meet.

The cashier at  the hardware store told the man ahead of us, “we need to clean them out.” There was something sinister in the young man’s face as he said that.  I remember Lloyd Brown – beaten to death by two drunken Butte College Students who discovered him sleeping in an alley. I don’t want that kind of campaign.

The cops have gotten raises, and the city is talking seriously about hiring more cops. The county Behavioral Health Department got over a million dollars in grants to deal with the mentally ill, and have recently closed escrow on a new Chico Behavioral Health Center. Why are we still having this problem with “street people”?

I’ve had enough of David Little’s bullying

15 Aug

NOTE: I’ve closed comments on this post because last night I got a mail box full of pictures of obese police officers. Unfortunately, they were all real, but none of them were Chico cops so I didn’t see the point. That wasn’t the subject of the post – David Little edited my opinion because he didn’t like what I thought of his actions. That’s not good editing, I’ve written to too many other papers where the editor had a difference of opinion with me, and said so, but printed my letter verbatim. 

But, sorry for the baby temper tantrum – I’ll go on writing letters to the ER, we’ll see if Little will continue to print them, and how.

The Enterprise Record printed a letter with my name on it two days ago, but it wasn’t the original letter I sent them over a week ago. Here’s the letter I sent.

On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 7:29 AM, juanita sumner wrote:

In October of last year, right before a city election, I asked the city clerk and council why the campaign reports were no longer available online. Reports that had been easily available for years had suddenly vanished,  the current filings had also disappeared.   

The clerk responded [read her full response at chicotaxpayers.com ] ,   “There is no regulation requiring the documents to be uploaded to the City’s website unless an agency has implemented mandatory electronic filings (Gov. Code § 84601(d)). ” She acted as though I was harassing her.  The reports were restored to the website briefly, but disappeared again sometime after the November election. 

In her response to my inquiry, the clerk said that the city was going to have a new system “up and running by the first of the year”, but here we are again, with the reports in disarray. The old system worked beautifully right up until October of 2014. 

I’d like to thank Randall Stone for raising this issue to the public. I’m very concerned that neither the Mayor nor  the Editor think this is any of the public’s business. 

This problem lies in the charter – the clerk works for council, not the voters. I’m with Jim Matthews – the charter needs to be changed to make the clerk an elected official so that person is answerable to the voters. 

Juanita Sumner, Chico

I was starting to wonder what had happened to it when David Little got back to me the following Monday:

Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2015 09:01:19 -0700
Subject: Re: letter to editor
From: letters@chicoer.com
To: juanita sumner

Regarding the line “I’m very concerned that neither the mayor nor the editor think this is any of the public’s business,” that will be deleted from your letter for print unless you can show me precisely where that was said. At least in the case of our editorial, you are drastically changing our words.

David Little, editor
Chico Enterprise-Record, Oroville Mercury-Register
400 E. Park Ave., Chico, CA 95927
Telephone: 530-896-7793
Twitter: @ER_DavidLittle

Why is this guy such a creep? Please note, I didn’t use anybody’s words. I didn’t put quotation marks around that line, he did. It was not a quote, it was my opinion. That’s what the opinion page is for.

I’ll say here, the letter Stephanie Taber wrote criticizing Randall Stone has mistakes. For one thing, she refers to Todd Boothe’s public Facebook page as a private e-mail, saying Stone had disclosed a private e-mail. That’s a lot different than what Stone had done – alert the public to a vicious and demented member of the police department who was behaving very inappropriately on a website that could be seen by anybody who searched his name. 

But I’ve been through this with Little before – he’s not a journalist, he’s a propagandist. Here he doesn’t like my opinion, so he edits it. Or, in this case, forces me to edit.  I didn’t want his edit, so I had to rewrite my letter.  I apologized to the asshole and sent a rewrite – and later I felt really cheap. 

I’ll never write another letter to the Enterprise Record. I’ve had enough of David Little. He’s a bully who uses his position to further his and his friends’ agendas.  I don’t read the Enterprise Record anymore, there are so many better newspapers locally and throughout the state. Channel 7 (KRCR) even carries stories that the ER misses on a regular basis, check out their website here:

http://www.krcrtv.com/

One of the worst things about the ER is Topix. Little announced a few years back that because of rude remarks and personal attacks, Topix was being closed to folks who do not have a google, twitter or facebook account. Did the ugly attacks stop? No. They’ve kicked Rick Clements off a couple of times, only to let him back on – I’m going to throw this out there – Larry Wahl is a very good friend of Rick Clements. 

People don’t like the way I talk – at least I don’t spread misinformation. Little ran a letter weeks ago from a woman who said I called Chico PD officers “fat.” I asked Little to ask her to “show precisely where that was said“, but he didn’t answer me back. 

Jim Matthews: change management positions to elected offices, vote out $taffers who show arrogance toward the public

5 Aug

From yesterday’s Enterprise Record:

Make city department heads elected positions

I am very concerned about the recent behavior of Chico City Clerk Debbie Presson by hiding important documents and information from the public. It is her job to protect and serve the voters in Chico, and she isn’t doing it. As taxpayers we deserve better of our highly paid city officials.

Perhaps we need to change all of the management positions at the city to elected offices. That way we can vote out people who show such arrogance toward the public.

— Jim Matthews, Chico

No, Debbie Presson is not going to post the 460’s – is she doing it on purpose? or just incompetent?

4 Aug

Here’s the original post from October 2014 –

Juanita Sumner's avatarChico Taxpayers Association

RE: CPOA 460 late, no reports available online

To: Chris Constantin, Mark Sorensen, Mark Orme, dlittle@chicoer.com
Cc: juanita sumner
1 attachment (1484.4 KB)
Download 2014_Political Reform Act.pdf (1484.4 KB)
2014_Political Reform Act.pdf
View online

I would like to respond to Ms. Sumner’s latest email regarding a process that is regulated by the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC).   While I don’t expect Ms. Sumner to print my response nor include the documents that are attached (which have been OCR’d in order for the reader to copy and paste from the documents), I feel it is important to respond so that accurate information (with documentation) can be presented to the public instead of being provided with vitriol that is not meant to inform our citizenry but instead to disparage those individuals Ms. Sumner writes about.   I also recognize by trying to provide this information that I only open myself up to…

View original post 1,004 more words

New ordinance, new salaries – same old problems – how do we get Chico PD to do their job?

3 Aug
When I went to the Airport Commission meeting last week I noticed somebody had taken up residence outside the front door of City Hall.

When I went to the Airport Commission meeting last week I noticed somebody had taken up residence outside the front door of City Hall.

Anybody who frequents Downtown, Midtown, and Lower Bidwell Park has noticed more homeless, or “street” people than ever. They have firm encampments at City Hall, City Plaza, the Vallombrosa post office annex, and throughout Bidwell Park. They mill up and down Mangrove and Vallombrosa Avenues around the Safeway shopping center.   As you get away from the city center and the park,  you see them alone or in pairs, moving along the main corridors of town, congregating wherever they can get cash for recyclables, or be out of the sight of passing cops, like the parking lot behind Raley’s on East Avenue.

The problem being, most of us have a hard time separating the truly needy from the hardpan criminals. Having observed the little mob that congregates at the recycling facility behind East Avenue Raleys, I was shocked to hear a report that a couple of them had got in a fight in broad daylight and one man had produced some sort of blade and stabbed the other.  That got my attention – I’ve parked my car on that side of the store since I had toddlers in hand.  

We see them regularly in our old midtown neighborhood now, they seem to be following the freeway across town. Our immediate neighbors, including a large church, noticed a brief upswing in crime, with some cars broken into and reports of bicycles stolen from garages. A car was broken into across the street from our house, again in broad daylight.  One afternoon not long after that, my husband and I encountered a woman out in front of our house who had just caught a couple of men in her garage with their hands on her son’s bike. She had chased them out and then got into her car to see which direction they’d headed. She said they had one bike of their own, and both jumped on it fleeing her garage. She was unable to follow them.  

This is a pattern I recognize all over town, don’t you?  Watch the local news – people have caught daytime break-ins on their security cameras. Full faces are shown. No arrests have been made that I’ve heard of, not since they got  the kid who was breaking into schools months ago. I haven’t heard of anybody getting their stolen property back either. 

The authorities have always acted as though a car break-in is the victim’s fault, especially in the park. Sometimes valuables have been left in plain sight, sometimes cars are smashed and rifled and nothing noticeable is taken. It’s as though you are stupid to leave your car unattended anywhere, including your own driveway. 

I’ve been shopping for mosquito netting – the other day I saw a screen that is specially made for your big garage door, with zipper openings big enough to get your car in and out. Great idea – airing your garage will cool down your house. But who would leave their garage open and untended around here?

 Did you know, local policeman Peter Durfee is the president not only of the Chico Police Officers’ Association (which is also a political PAC) but also the Chico Realtors Association? Durfee is a realtor? Wow, where does he find the time?  

Durfee is the officer who occasionally gets sick of the criticism of Chico PD and goes on a tear Downtown harassing street people. Not that I mind – he’s supposed to harass people for breaking the law. Anytime he’s felt like it, he’s managed to find about a violation every six feet – the sit and lie ordinance the cops screamed for is very specific. I see violations every time I go out. 

The picture above I took last week at City Hall at about 6:30 pm Wednesday.  There’s almost always a bed  laying in this spot. It still lay there when we exited the Airport Commission meeting, so my husband  snapped a picture of it. As we were leaving the little portico, a bedraggled man came round to see what we were doing. He smiled his drunken smile and greeted us with a tinge of fear – were we going to give him a bad time?   No, that’s not our job. At least one cop and more than a half dozen staffers, including city manager Mark Orme, had passed that bedding on their way into the chamber. He had been smoking in the non-smoking area when we arrived, and was still smoking when we came out. 

I get such a kick out of City Council, I’d really like to return the favor sometime, right in the seat of Mark Sorensen’s pants. They wasted hours of $taff time and passed that stupid sit and lie ordinance despite the fact they’d passed a similar ordinance years before that wasn’t being enforced. Now we see the same with sit and lie. Council also gave the cops very generous raises in exchange for paying three percent more of their pension – 12 percent. Out of salaries in excess of $100,000, they pay 12 percent of  pensions comprising 90 percent of  their highest year’s salary, available at age 50.

I predict Durfee will retire at 50, and then I predict he will make a run for city council. I predict he will be our mayor someday.

Just about the time our town is poised to go straight  down the shitter. Good luck Pete! 

 

 

Thanks to councilman Randall Stone for taking city clerk Debbie Presson to task over her refusal to post the campaign reports

29 Jul

A year or so ago I got into an ugly bitch fight with Chico City Clerk Debbie Presson over the posting of the campaign contribution reports on the website. For starters she was letting the cops go months beyond the report deadline with their PAC filing, letting them get off without paying the per-day fine. I quit when I felt she was trying to set me up for some sort of harassment suit. I also got e-mails from Stephanie Taber and Sean Morgan telling me I needed to “back off” of Presson. I started to feel like I might have the makings of a suit myself, but I’m not that kind of person.

Now it looks like Presson has taken everything off the website and requires people to physically present themselves in her office at her convenience to view the physical records. That’s view – if you want copies you will pay per page. 

Council member Randall Stone has taken up this issue with a Facebook posting here:

https://www.facebook.com/ElectStone/posts/732600713534996?comment_id=733024570159277&offset=0&total_comments=22&notif_t=feed_comment

I’m going to go on a little rant here. 

Debbie Presson is not fit for public office. She uses her position, in which she is supposed to protect the voters, to protect herself and her coworkers. Instead of working in the voter’s best interests, she furthers the best interests of herself and her friends. She uses her position to cover corruption, and that’s corrupt. 

Furthermore, I’ll say, the city charter needs to be changed so that the city clerk is elected like the county clerk is elected. Things might be different if her $135,000 salary, plus health benefits and pension, were on the line every four years.  I notice county clerk Candace Grubbs’ office is a lot more responsive. Grubbs also has plenty of help – Presson cut her staff and took a larger salary, but has the nerve to tell us she’s shorthanded! 

I see Stone has got a discussion going on this issue – at last, some sunshine in the sewer that is Downtown  Chico.

 

 

Attorney General Kamala Harris is investigating former CPUC president Michael Peevey – so far CPUC has spent $5 million (of our money!) on attorneys

28 Jul

According to the Sacramento Bee, “Attorney General Kamala Harris’ office is investigating former President Michael Peevey, and perhaps other current and former commission employees, and the CPUC is paying an outside law firm, Sheppard Mullin, to represent it.”

The Bee also says “The commission entered into the contract [with Sheppard Mullin] in November 2014, claiming it was for $49,000 [as stated in the above linked story]; the contract since has ballooned to $5 million-plus.”

Former CPUC president Michael Peevey, who stepped down amid a scandal involving his inappropriate relationship with PG&E, will pay his own attorneys – I’m sure he has plenty of dough! “…internal PG&E emails show Peevey sought a $1 million PG&E donation to combat a ballot measure in 2010, while the commission considered issues related to PG&E, including the 2010 gas line explosion that killed 38 people in San Bruno.

Southern California Edison disclosed that Peevey asked Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric to donate $25 million to fund a center at UCLA, as the commission was deciding how to apportion the $4.8 billion in costs of shutting the San Onofre nuclear power plant.”

These people are so shameless.

The Bee asks, “But why does a public agency with nothing to hide need a team of criminal defense lawyers to represent it against another public agency that is seeking to determine whether there has been wrongdoing? What sort of precedent does this set?”

This precedent will become the way it is as long as the public fails to act.

Staff pushing council to forgive $205,539 Nature Center loan – tonight, in a special meeting with 24 hours notice

22 Jul

I received the original agenda for tonight’s meeting on Monday, then  an amended agenda containing this report yesterday. This subject was originally brought up June 2, but somebody  raised a Brown Act issue. I bet! 

I went ahead and posted the whole report, sorry for the hasty cut and paste job.

The Nature Center runs a for profit day care center, and they haven’t been showing their books. When I asked for their finance reports at a meeting, Mark Sorensen told me, “that’s enough Juanita!”  

Why isn’t the center being offered to a group that can manage  it properly? Why is this group so in the red? $250,000 in expenses for running kid’s camps? Why won’t they provide all their financial information, salaries, etc? 

http://www.guidestar.org/organizations/68-0341188/chico-creek-nature-center.aspx

Here’s the link to the whole agenda:

http://chico-ca.granicus.com/GeneratedAgendaViewer.php?view_id=2&event_id=221

REPORT IN BRIEF: The City Council will consider several options related to a loan provided to the Chico Creek Nature Center that is currently in default. Options include forgiving the loan to deferring or calling the loan. At its May 20, 2014 meeting, Council authorized staff to prepare Amendment No. 4 to the agreement that would: (1) reset the accumulated interest and penalties owed for the period beginning July 15, 2009, through April 15, 2014, to zero ($0) so that only the current principal balance of $181,026.95 is owed; (2) adjust the interest rate from 1.80 percent per annum to 3.42 percent per annum from July 15, 2014 forward; and (3) establish interest only payments for one year beginning with the payment due July 15, 2014. Staff prepared Amendment No. 4, however, the CCNC did not agree with these terms and, as of the date of this staff report, has not signed the Amendment resulting in the loan falling into a default status.

RECOMMENDATION That the City Council authorize the City Manager to execute an amendment to the “Restated Loan Agreement for the Construction of New Exhibit and Classroom Facility, Chico Creek Nature Center, Inc.” to either: Option 1 – Loan Forgiveness – Forgive the Chico Creek Nature Center of its loan obligation. Option 2 – Loan Foraiveness with conditions – Forgive the Chico Creek Nature Center of its loan obligation with conditions as specified by the City Manager. Defer loan payments for a period not exceeding August 1, 2015 until successful negotiations on agreements conclude. If agreement is not reached, proceed with Option 4. Option 3 – Defer Loan Obligations – Defer all payment of interest until July 1, 2016. Option 4 – No Action – City Council takes no action and City Administration works with City Attorney’s Office to proceed with available remedies specified through the agreements with the Chico Creek Nature Center. FISCAL IMPACT: The “Restated Loan Agreement for the Construction of New Exhibit and Classroom Facility Chico Creek Nature Center, Inc.” establishes quarterly loan payments, in the amount of $3,397.43, due on the 15th of January, April, July, and October. The original loan amount was $185,000 and the total annual loan payment is $13,589.72. Loan payments not received within 15 days of the due date are to bear a penalty of additional interest at a rate of one-half percent (0.5%) per month which has been waived for the majority of the deferred payments. Because the loan was made from a development impact fund, the City Attorney’s Office advises that if the loan obligation were to be forgiven, the General Fund would be required to reimburse Fund 347 – Zone I Neighborhood Parks for the current principal balance plus accumulated interest, a total of approximately $205,539.71.If the two year deferral request is granted without penalty, and the interest rate is adjusted to 3.42 percent per annum, then the deferred payments will be added to the end of the amortization schedule and interest will continue to accrue. If the loan’s accumulated interest and penalties are reset to $0 and an adjusted interest rate of 3.42 percent per annum is applied to the current principal balance of $181,026.95, then the Nature Center’s payments would be approximately $1,547.78 per quarter ($6,191.12 peryear).The Nature Center would be required to request in writing by April 1 st of each year to continue interest only payments or to advise that it can begin payments of both principal plus interest. The City may periodically review and adjust the interest rate in accordance with the City’s actual rate of return on investment. An interest only payment would provide a small revenue stream to the City until such time as the Nature Center can resume full loan payments.

BACKGROUND: The Chico Creek Nature Center (CCNC) leases property, including two City owned buildings, in Bidwell Park along East Eighth Street between Cedar Grove Picnic Area and the Deer Pen. As consideration for such use, and in lieu of the payment of rent, the CCNC operates a nature museum and conducts educational classes and programs on nature and the environment for the benefit of the public. The lease was executed July 1, 1996, amended on July 21, 2005, and terminates December 31, 2027. One of the City owned buildings, the administration building, was destroyed by an arson fire in April 1998. By City Council motion on November 10,2005, the City Council approved a request from the CCNC for a loan in the amount of $185,000, bearing an interest rate of 5.24 percent per annum, to cover the balance of increased construction costs for the new exhibit and classroom facilities within the new building that were not covered by grant funds, insurance proceeds, or existing donations. It was the intention of the CCNC to conduct fundraising activities to generate funds to make the loan payments and, in the event fund raising activities failed to generate sufficient funds, the CCNC had agreed to use interest generated from its Paradise Community Foundation endowment as security for the loan to make the loan payments. Upon completion of construction, the first loan payment was made July 15, 2008. After making four quarterly payments, the CCNC requested a deferral of loan payments for three years due to unanticipated costs associated with the completion of the new facility which required the Nature Center to divert operating funds to capital expenses and to use the interest generated from its Paradise Community Foundation endowment for operating expenses, making the endowment funds that had been identified as security for the loan unavailable. The Finance Committee recommended deferral of the loan payments that were due July 15, 2009, through April 15, 2010, with associated penalties, and the deferral of the loan payments due July 15, 2010, through April 15, 2011, without penalty, but recommended that deferral of the third year of payments be considered following staff analysis of a business plan to be submitted by the CCNC. Subsequently Council authorized the City Manager to execute Amendment No. 1 to the agreement subject to these conditions. The Finance Committee recommended the third year of deferred loan payments (July 15, 2011, through April 15, 2012), without penalty, based on staff review of the CCNC’s business plan which showed they were making progress toward financial stability and could potentially be in a position to resume quarterly loan payments in fiscal year 2012-13. Council approved the recommendation at which time Councilmember Holcombe suggested staff review the loan’s interest rate relative to the City’s actual rate of return on investment and that Council consider a future discussion regarding forgiveness of the loan. Council authorized the City Manager to execute Amendment No. 2 to the agreement subject to these conditions. In 2012 the Finance Committee considered the CCNC’s request for an additional three years of deferred loan payments (July 15, 2012 through April 15, 2015). In addition, as requested by Councilmember Holcombe, staff reviewed the City’s actual rate of return on investment and recommended that the interest rate be adjusted from 5.24 percent per annum to 1.80 percent per annum to more accurately reflect the City’s actual rate of return on investment The Finance Committee recommended to Council that only a two year deferral be granted, through April 15, 2014, and that the interest rate be adjusted to 1.80 percent per annum retroactive to the payment due July 15, 2009. Council authorized the City Manager to execute Amendment No. 3 to the agreement subject to these conditions.By letter dated April 2, 2014, the CCNC requested an additional two year deferral of loan payments, from July 15, 2014 through April 15, 2016. When the Finance Committee considered this request Committee Member Stone was in favor of forgiving the loan, Committee Member Sorensen was not in favor of forgiving the loan, and Committee Member Gruendl was absent. The request was forwarded to the City Council without a Committee recommendation. At its May 20, 2014 meeting, Council authorized staff to prepare Amendment No. 4 to the agreement that would: (1) reset the accumulated interest and penalties owed for the period beginning July 15,2009, through April 15, 2014, to zero ($0) so that only the current principal balance of $181,026.95 was owed; (2) adjust the interest rate from 1.80 percent per annum to 3.42 percent per annum from July 15, 2014 forward; and (3) establish interest only payments for one year beginning with the payment due July 15, 2014. Staff prepared Amendment No. 4; however, the CCNC did not agree with these terms and, as of the date of this staff report, has not signed the Amendment. DISCUSSION: Since the City and the Chico Creek Nature Center (CCNC) have not been able to execute a 4’h amendment to modify the loan agreement as directed by Council, the CCNC is in default of the original loan agreement. Based on the loan’s history and the actions taken over the past years, there is high likelihood that the CCNC will not be able to ever repay the loan. The loan proceeds went into improving a building that is and will remain City property. At this point, the City must take a final action on whether to call the loan or forgive it. In March 2015, to minimize the impact on the City, the City Council approved the use of one-time, General Fund, carry over funds from 2013-14 to move the debt obligation from Fund 347 – Zone I Neighborhood Parks Fund to the General Fund. This still results in an accounts receivable; however, if the City forgives the loan, the City would not have to identify funds to cover the loan obligation in the neighborhood parks fund. City staff are requesting the City Council consider four options on resolving the loan. Request from CCNC

The CCNC indicates that the City’s decision to reduce community based organization funding in 2014-15 has created significant financial difficulties for the CCNC and in October 2014, the CCNC provided a written request to the City to reconsider the relationship between the City and the CCNC. The letter requested the City consider four options or an alternative if none of the four options were acceptable. The requested options include that the City: 1) assume the CCNC loan; 2) provide funding to CCNC for visitor services and the subsidizing of programs for local families; 3) provide the CCNC a place at the table when discussing Transient Occupancy Tax decisions; or 4) become a significant funder of the CCNC Alternative: the CCNC wants the City to fund the Bidwell Park visitor information services and the CCNC will then begin paying off the loan. The nature of the request was more expansive than the City Council considered during the May 2014 meeting. Further, funds the City would provide to CCNC under option 2 would appear to be used to pay the loan which is essentially the City paying itself. As a result, this CCNC options do not appear to be viable option for the City. City Proposed Options City staff prepared several options for the City Council’s consideration to either resolve the loan, continue the past practice of deferring the loan, or proceed with enforcement of the agreement default provisions. These options and considerations are provided below.

Option 1 – Loan Forgiveness – Forgive the Chico Creek Nature Center of its loan obligation. City staff presented this option in May 2014. The loan was used to benefit City owned property, and an argument could be made that the City directly benefited by the expenditure of loan funds to improve the area leased by the CCNC. However, the recitals to the loan agreement indicate that the loan agreement was to cover the increased construction costs for the new exhibit and classroom facility at the CCNC, items that may not have been constructed but for the CCNC’s intended use. The current situation involves the CCNC not being able to make payments for over five years. Consequently, there is increasing likelihood that our external auditors will view the loan obligation as bad debt. The City Council’s action in May 2015 to move the debt from Fund 347 – Zone I Neighborhood Parks to the General Fund as an account receivable provided a buffer to the City’s operations as well as address the issues auditors may have had with bad debt. If the City had liquidated the loan prior to taking this action, the City would have had to identify sufficient funds to cover the debt. To the extent that it happens during a fiscal year, finding additional resources may impact operations. Finally, eliminating the loan would also eliminate another complicated relationship that is unique among other lease agreements with non-profit entities.

Option 2 – Loan Forqiveness with conditions – Forgive the Chico Creek Nature Center of its loan obligation with conditions as specified by the City Manager. Defer loan payments for a period not exceeding August 1, 2015 until successful negotiations on agreements conclude. If agreement is not reached, proceed with Option 4. Same explanation as provided in Option 1. The City has undertaken a review of City leases in order to establish a citywide policy governing leases and creating more consistency from one lease to another. Currently, the CCNC has a lease which expires in 2027. The City wishes to keep leases to no more than 2-3 years with voluntary extensions to 5 years until the City engages in a more thorough vetting of leases going over 5 years. Additionally, the City needs to strengthen records retention and audit provisions, establish more explicit performance standards, and introduce more comprehensive reporting requirements to leases. The loan situation with the CCNC offers a win-win solution where the City can forgive the loan while modifying its lease agreements to obtain changes meant to protect the City’s assets and the viability of the organizations leasing the assets. This option would provide the CCNC and City time to revise the lease agreement while retaining the ability to enforce loan provisions in the default situation.

Option 3 – Defer Loan Obligations – Defer all payment of interest until July 1, 2016. This options continues the past practice of delaying the obligation. If this option is selected, the City would evaluate the CCNC’s ability to operate as a going concern in order to better advise the City Council in addressing the loan in 2016 Option 4 – No Action – City Council takes no action and City Administration works with City Attorney’s Office to proceed with available remedies specified through the agreements with the Chico Creek Nature Center. The agreements with CCNC include default provisions that may result in the City taking legal action on the loan note. Ultimately, this option would negatively impact the CCNC and result in the City buildings remaining vacant for the foreseeable future. Currently, the CCNC pays utilities and conducts basic maintenance to sustain the status quo of the facilities. The City would become responsible for these costs should the CCNC lose possession of the buildings.

CONCLUSION: The options provided in this staff report should address the long standing deficiency in the Chico Creek Nature Center’s (CCNC) performance on its loan and lease agreements. Actions taken previously buffer the City from an unforeseen financial impact from having to address the loan against the Neighborhood Parks Fund.Opportunity exists for the City to revise the CCNC agreements to better meet the City’s goals related to its property leases while also providing an opportunity for the CCNC to achieve its goal of being a viable organization.

CARD reschedules final budget meeting – July 30, Lakeside Pavilion, 3pm

21 Jul

I was unable to make the CARD board meeting last week. I missed the opportunity to tell them what I think about the budget. According to the subsequent article in the Enterprise Record, only one member of the public showed up with a comment – an Aqua Jets parent, who wanted to say he was happy to see the board going forward with plans to build a fancy new aquatic center. 

It frustrates me that nobody pays attention to this board. I’ll admit, sometimes I get a bad attitude because I think nobody else cares.  I could have put a muster on it and made that meeting last week, but I was tired, just like the rest of you, after a long day, and I didn’t feel like it. 

I’ll admit, I haven’t felt like it a lot lately.  It’s not like they roll out the red carpet to the public. I’ve been trying to get into the Aquatic Center Advisory Committee meetings for a couple of years now. I finally got into a meeting a couple of months ago, only to find the committee was disjointed and many members were not up to speed. Turns out, most of the real discussion and decision making has been going on in ad-hoc committees of former Chico City manager Tom Lando, former CARD manager and board member Jerry Hughes, and members of Chico city staff, the police department, and other public officials.  There have been special meetings called with 24 hours notice. When I’ve tried to get reports of these meetings I’ve been handed around from one staffer to another. I asked to be on the notice list for these meetings.  Interim manager Steve Visconti told me I’d be contacted by incoming manager Ann Willman, who left her post at Oroville Recreation District after only a year or so to take the manager’s position in Chico. He told me I’d get a report of that special “inter government” meeting, but I’m still waiting. Willman was supposed to have started her job July 6.

I’m guessing these meetings are about a sales tax increase initiative, as well as city funding for the aquatic center.

I predicted cost overruns on that center – Lando is already announcing they will need more than twice the budgeted amount – about $75,000 – just for a feasibility study. He wants to get that out of the city parks fund. 

The good news is, they have postponed their final budget meeting, which was to be held in two days, to July 30. I hope more members of the public will show up to address this fiscal irresponsibility. It’s nuts, and we need people to turn out in droves to say so. That’s Thursday, July 30, at 3pm, Lakeside Pavilion, Chico. 

 

Airport Commission scheduled to meet July 28 – Chico Chamber demanding commercial air service, wants city to pay $40 – 60,000 for a survey

17 Jul

thanks Jim for reminding me – the airport report, released in March, is a must-read.

http://www.chico.ca.us/airport/documents/AirlineFeasibiltyCommitteeReport3-3-15.pdf

Read it and ask yourself why we need to spend money on another survey. Katie Simmons of Chico Chamber wants a survey “of who uses the airport and where they fly”, and then she wants the city to guarantee the airline over $3 million in revenues, meaning, if they don’t sell tickets, the taxpayers pay.  For roughly 60 people who fly regularly. Many of the businesses in the survey suggested they’d be as happy to use a ground shuttle to Sacramento Airport if shuttle tickets were priced more reasonably. The shuttle currently charges $60, one way.  Respondents said they’d be willing to pay $35. Most respondents expressed total disinterest in paying for any kind of study. Simmons is demanding the taxpayers pay for it.

Read it yourself. There’s an airport commission meeting scheduled  for July 28.